Dessers

[TamCoopz 19,605]

4 minutes ago, beararse said:

Dozens? So, a min 24 squandered guilt edged chances? Think you might be exaggerating there.

Did you miss the bit where he said across the whole season? 

[beararse 6,472]

1 hour ago, TamCoopz said:

Did you miss the bit where he said across the whole season? 

Nope. Read it.

Dessers has hit 43 shots in the SPFL so far this season. 2 hit the woodwork, 26 were on target and he’s scored 10 (ie 23% of his shots have resulted in goals)

Haaland had a strike rate of 34% in the EPL last season when he scored 36 goals from 106 shots.

If we held Dessers accountable to Haaland’s conversion rate then he should be on 15 in the SPFL by now.

So he’s 5 short of where he should be if we’re going to compare him statistically to the most prolific striker ever to have played in the Premiership.

Closer to home, Shankland has scored 17 goals in the SPFL this season,  having taken 68 shots (ie 25%) and played 878 more minutes of football than Dessers. 

If Dessers matched Shankland he’d have scored 11 (rounded up from 10.75). Yet folk think Shankland is infinitely better than Dessers.

What does Shankland do when he misses with 75% of his shots? Is he squandering them?  If he came to Rangers would his similar miss rate to Dessers be accepted?

The point is Dessers isn’t ‘squandering’ shots any more than Shankland and if he’s squandering more chances than Shankland it’s because he’s creating more chances to actually squander. 

[NitshillBear 1,490]

31 minutes ago, beararse said:

Nope. Read it.

Dessers has hit 43 shots in the SPFL so far this season. 2 hit the woodwork, 26 were on target and he’s scored 10 (ie 23% of his shots have resulted in goals)

Haaland had a strike rate of 34% in the EPL last season when he scored 36 goals from 106 shots.

If we held Dessers accountable to Haaland’s conversion rate then he should be on 15 in the SPFL by now.

So he’s 5 short of where he should be if we’re going to compare him statistically to the most prolific striker ever to have played in the Premiership.

Closer to home, Shankland has scored 17 goals in the SPFL this season,  having taken 68 shots (ie 25%) . 

If Dessers matched Shankland he’d have scored 11 (rounded up from 10.75). Yet folk think Shankland is infinitely better than Dessers.

What does Shankland do when he misses with 75% of his shots? Is he squandering them?  If he came to Rangers would his similar miss rate to Dessers be accepted?

I'm no big Shankland fan, but you've got to think that we produce a better quality of chance than Hearts. 

[Rangers_no1 33,096]

29 minutes ago, NitshillBear said:

I'm no big Shankland fan, but you've got to think that we produce a better quality of chance than Hearts. 

Hearts get a lot more space in the box than we do against sides who park the bus.

[theblueoysterbar 19,844]

1 hour ago, beararse said:

Nope. Read it.

Dessers has hit 43 shots in the SPFL so far this season. 2 hit the woodwork, 26 were on target and he’s scored 10 (ie 23% of his shots have resulted in goals)

Haaland had a strike rate of 34% in the EPL last season when he scored 36 goals from 106 shots.

If we held Dessers accountable to Haaland’s conversion rate then he should be on 15 in the SPFL by now.

So he’s 5 short of where he should be if we’re going to compare him statistically to the most prolific striker ever to have played in the Premiership.

Closer to home, Shankland has scored 17 goals in the SPFL this season,  having taken 68 shots (ie 25%) and played 878 more minutes of football than Dessers. 

If Dessers matched Shankland he’d have scored 11 (rounded up from 10.75). Yet folk think Shankland is infinitely better than Dessers.

What does Shankland do when he misses with 75% of his shots? Is he squandering them?  If he came to Rangers would his similar miss rate to Dessers be accepted?

The point is Dessers isn’t ‘squandering’ shots any more than Shankland and if he’s squandering more chances than Shankland it’s because he’s creating more chances to actually squander. 

Do you have the stats for Dessers and Shankland from shots outside the box mate?

[beararse 6,472]

47 minutes ago, NitshillBear said:

I'm no big Shankland fan, but you've got to think that we produce a better quality of chance than Hearts. 

Im not convinced. Hearts will seldom face a low block so they might be presented with better opportunities. 

[magic8ball 27,901]

1 hour ago, beararse said:

Nope. Read it.

Dessers has hit 43 shots in the SPFL so far this season. 2 hit the woodwork, 26 were on target and he’s scored 10 (ie 23% of his shots have resulted in goals)

Haaland had a strike rate of 34% in the EPL last season when he scored 36 goals from 106 shots.

If we held Dessers accountable to Haaland’s conversion rate then he should be on 15 in the SPFL by now.

So he’s 5 short of where he should be if we’re going to compare him statistically to the most prolific striker ever to have played in the Premiership.

Closer to home, Shankland has scored 17 goals in the SPFL this season,  having taken 68 shots (ie 25%) and played 878 more minutes of football than Dessers. 

If Dessers matched Shankland he’d have scored 11 (rounded up from 10.75). Yet folk think Shankland is infinitely better than Dessers.

What does Shankland do when he misses with 75% of his shots? Is he squandering them?  If he came to Rangers would his similar miss rate to Dessers be accepted?

The point is Dessers isn’t ‘squandering’ shots any more than Shankland and if he’s squandering more chances than Shankland it’s because he’s creating more chances to actually squander. 

Don’t think it’s changed much over the years .But between 1 in 3 and 1 in 4 is about the norm across the board for a strike rate .
Dessers for me isn’t his goal scoring that’s his problem .It’s the silly mistakes he does make too many .

[beararse 6,472]

12 minutes ago, theblueoysterbar said:

Do you have the stats for Dessers and Shankland from shots outside the box mate?

I don’t but I suspect Shankland will be well out in front. Possibly down to Hearts not facing a low block, or being set up to funnel absolutely everything to Shankland whenever they get the chance. 

[beararse 6,472]

20 minutes ago, magic8ball said:

Don’t think it’s changed much over the years .But between 1 in 3 and 1 in 4 is about the norm across the board for a strike rate .
Dessers for me isn’t his goal scoring that’s his problem .It’s the silly mistakes he does make too many .

Dessers does tend to spoil any goodwill he builds up by making an arse of something but that’s more down to the fans having made up their minds and not cutting him any slack.

Silva is the opposite of Dessers: great feet, fast and direct but cost Wolves £40m yet was pretty pish when he came on last night, but gets the benefit of doubt despite little credit in the bank, because he’s better on the eye, was brought in by Clement and wasn’t involved in the Beale shit show.

[ElBufalo20 7,977]

1 hour ago, beararse said:

Nope. Read it.

Dessers has hit 43 shots in the SPFL so far this season. 2 hit the woodwork, 26 were on target and he’s scored 10 (ie 23% of his shots have resulted in goals)

Haaland had a strike rate of 34% in the EPL last season when he scored 36 goals from 106 shots.

If we held Dessers accountable to Haaland’s conversion rate then he should be on 15 in the SPFL by now.

So he’s 5 short of where he should be if we’re going to compare him statistically to the most prolific striker ever to have played in the Premiership.

Closer to home, Shankland has scored 17 goals in the SPFL this season,  having taken 68 shots (ie 25%) and played 878 more minutes of football than Dessers. 

If Dessers matched Shankland he’d have scored 11 (rounded up from 10.75). Yet folk think Shankland is infinitely better than Dessers.

What does Shankland do when he misses with 75% of his shots? Is he squandering them?  If he came to Rangers would his similar miss rate to Dessers be accepted?

The point is Dessers isn’t ‘squandering’ shots any more than Shankland and if he’s squandering more chances than Shankland it’s because he’s creating more chances to actually squander. 

He missed 2 open goals last night.

Stats and percentagess are irrelevant when you can see it with your own eyes.

[beararse 6,472]

23 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said:

He missed 2 open goals last night.

Stats and percentagess are irrelevant when you can see it with your own eyes.

Also scored 2 goals which ultimately won us the game. 

[NitshillBear 1,490]

1 hour ago, beararse said:

Im not convinced. Hearts will seldom face a low block so they might be presented with better opportunities. 

So you and @Rangers_no1 reckon it's *easier* to score goals for Hearts than it is for Rangers? 🤔

[J-Maestro 11,808]

39 minutes ago, NitshillBear said:

So you and @Rangers_no1 reckon it's *easier* to score goals for Hearts than it is for Rangers? 🤔

What is hard to understand about it? The idea is that you're not constantly playing against 10 men in the box. You might get more 'chances' at Rangers but they're going to be in traffic almost always.

[beararse 6,472]

41 minutes ago, NitshillBear said:

So you and @Rangers_no1 reckon it's *easier* to score goals for Hearts than it is for Rangers? 🤔

Yep. That’s exactly what I’m saying. 

[left winger 14,630]

10 hours ago, ElBufalo20 said:

He missed 2 open goals last night.

Stats and percentagess are irrelevant when you can see it with your own eyes.

Did you not see his two goals with your own eyes? Or are those stats irrelevant?

[Southsider 320]

There's probably too many variables involved.  Yes, we face a low block more than Hearts, but you usually only score when you are in possession and we have the ball a lot.  You also need supply- Tav played the cross/pass for all three goals on Wednesday and we have players like Cantwell who can create.

Still don't think we should be signing Shankland in the summer, mind

[OrangeRab 3,031]

Surely folk aren’t claiming it’s easier to score for Hearts or the Sheep than us?

Almost every striker who moves to the OF scores significantly more. Boyd, Griffiths, McDonald, Miller etc etc

We create more chances each game. 

Miovski and Shankland are having better seasons than Dessers. 

[ElBufalo20 7,977]

37 minutes ago, left winger said:

Did you not see his two goals with your own eyes? Or are those stats irrelevant?

Where have I criticised Dessers goals or performance?

My point was trying to justify percentages when it’s irrelevant to chances missed that are open goals.

He should’ve had 4 on Wednesday. Obviously not going to score with every chance but should be doing better with open goals.

No amount of statistics or percentages can defend that

[left winger 14,630]

9 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said:

Where have I criticised Dessers goals or performance?

My point was trying to justify percentages when it’s irrelevant to chances missed that are open goals.

He should’ve had 4 on Wednesday. Obviously not going to score with every chance but should be doing better with open goals.

No amount of statistics or percentages can defend that

If you pick some stats, it’s hardly surprising that someone else will pick other stats.

As a general principle, I’ll take 2 goals scored and 2 open goals missed from him every single match we play. That’ll win us a treble and probs a quadruple.

[Lord Lockin 3,941]

16 hours ago, BlueboyG said:

Ffs talk about totally misreading a post, Tav was excellent but were talking about Dessers misses and i said Tav had a howler with one of his shots read the full sentence not the bit you want to pick out.

Now now temper temper 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 11,343]

4 hours ago, OrangeRab said:

Surely folk aren’t claiming it’s easier to score for Hearts or the Sheep than us?

Almost every striker who moves to the OF scores significantly more. Boyd, Griffiths, McDonald, Miller etc etc

We create more chances each game. 

Miovski and Shankland are having better seasons than Dessers. 

I don’t particularly like it as a stat but need to look at the cumulative total xG for each of the players and then can begin to make some comparisons.

Total shots for all three are reasonably similar, so if it’s about the quality of the chances it’s only really xG that would somewhat show that.

The other two are better ‘footballers’ but really don’t think there’s much between them as goalscorers at all, and some of Dessers goals have been as good as any of Shankland’s or Miovski’s best.

[Southsider 320]

Thinking about Dessers

Would I be ok with the idea of us starting next season with 3 CFs - Danilo, A.N. Other (eg Miovski) and Dessers?

In all honesty, I probably would.  Yes, I'd happier if we signed Mbappe and Haaland but if Dessers can offer 20+ goals I think he is a reasonable squad option.

That said, if an offer came in which allowed us to get back what we paid or even make a profit, I'd probably sell.  But I don't think we should be trying to offload him at a big loss.

 

[TamCoopz 19,605]

3 minutes ago, Southsider said:

Thinking about Dessers

Would I be ok with the idea of us starting next season with 3 CFs - Danilo, A.N. Other (eg Miovski) and Dessers?

In all honesty, I probably would.  Yes, I'd happier if we signed Mbappe and Haaland but if Dessers can offer 20+ goals I think he is a reasonable squad option.

That said, if an offer came in which allowed us to get back what we paid or even make a profit, I'd probably sell.  But I don't think we should be trying to offload him at a big loss.

 

A.N. Other is overrated imo 

[demise 3,574]

55 minutes ago, TamCoopz said:

A.N. Other is overrated imo 

Alvaro Norata should be fine for us imo. 

[TamCoopz 19,605]

2 minutes ago, demise said:

Alvaro Norata should be fine for us imo. 

Sorry mate this sounds made up